文/罗思义 2015年12月25日　来源：观察者网　子夜星网站整理编辑

　　〔作者简介〕罗思义（John Ross），中国人民大学重阳金融研究院高级研究员，前英国伦敦市经济与商业政策署署长，先后担任英国议会成员和英国工党国家执行委员经济顾问。

　　为免引起误解，笔者有必要事先在此作出说明，笔者是邓小平改革开放政策而非毛泽东时代计划经济政策的坚定支持者。而且，笔者曾在本人所著的《邓小平是迄今为止世界最伟大的经济学家》、《邓小平理论和凯恩斯主义的经济理论框架对比研究》以及诸多文章中分析了个中原因。但这并不妨碍我对中国在1949-1976年毛泽东时代所取得的社会成就，作出客观评价。促使我写这篇文章的原因有二：一是中国是世界上人口最多的国家，其一举一动都会对世界产生深远影响；二是西方一些人对1949-1976年毛泽东时代的中国极尽抹黑之能事，中国一些所谓的知识分子也亦步亦趋紧跟西方步伐妖魔化毛泽东。但如下文所述，事实显示，1949-1976年中国取得了人类史上最伟大的社会成就──注意，此处我用的是“社会”而非“经济”这个词。正如下文的数据所示，我并没有夸大其词，而是对国际数据作过量化比较后，才审慎选择的这种说法。

　　西方试图掩盖中国1949-1976年所取得的史无前例的社会成就的方法，是一种典型的扭曲手法，即以一些个例扭曲整体形势。比如，著有《毛泽东时代的大饥荒》的荷兰学者冯克（Frank Dikotter）就据此称毛泽东时代的中国为“人间地狱”，但事实证明，现实与其说法截然相反。正如下文所述，人类史上从未有如此多的人如中国1949-1976年所做的一样，如此快速地提高其社会地位。

　　下文节选自本人即将出版的新书──《大超越：中美经济实力的最后博弈》，以从历史与国际层面，对毛泽东时代中国所取得的社会成就作一个比较。

　　我们此前已经比较分析了中国1978年改革开放前后的经济增长情况。尽管如此，如果不了解1949年至1978年改革之前所取得巨大的社会成就，我们仍可能会被误导。事实上，这些成就也是人类历史上由一个大国在类似时期内所取得的最伟大的社会进步──提高数量众多且占世界人口很大比例的人民的生活水平和社会环境，这是以往任何一个国家都未曾做到的。毫无疑问，这为全面分析改革前的成就提供了决定性的阐释，并针对中国历史中的各种问题提出了正确的看法，同时也让读者了解中国内部发展动力的特征。

　　预期寿命与人类福祉

　　判断一个国家社会和环境条件总体影响的最全面标准是预期平均寿命，因为预期寿命是经济、社会、环境、卫生、教育等发展趋势的正负两个方面综合影响的加总与平衡。因此，预期寿命是比纯粹的人均GDP更为充分的社会福祉衡量指标──两者同样重要，虽然人均GDP是决定预期寿命的最重要因素。正如诺贝尔经济学奖得主阿马蒂亚·森对于这些变量之间关系的概述：

　　个人收入无疑是决定其生存与死亡，以及更多地一个人生活质量高低的基本因素。然而，收入仅是影响我们享受生活的诸多变量之一……人均国民生产总值（GDP）可能是表明一个国家实际平均收入的一个良好指标，但人们实际得到的收入还将取决于这个国家收入的分配模式。此外，个人的生活质量不仅取决于其个人收入，同时还取决于各种物质和社会条件……医疗卫生的性质和医疗保险的性质──公共和私人──也是决定一个人生存与死亡的最重要因素。其他社会服务也一样，其中包括基础教育、城市生活秩序和人们所掌握的现代医学知识。因此，还有许多攸关人们生死存亡的因素没有纳入个人收入范围。

　　我们首先来看中国的长期发展：比较中国与另一个最大的发展中经济体──印度的预期寿命趋势，如下图所示。1947年，印度取得独立，当时该国人口的预期寿命为32岁。中国人在1949年新中国成立时的预期寿命为35岁──比印度高出3岁。到了1978年，中国改革前的最后一年，中国人的预期寿命为67岁，印度为55岁──差距扩大到12岁。差距明显加大并不是因为印度的表现糟糕──预期寿命在32年中增长了22岁，而是因为中国的表现极为出色──预期寿命在29年中提高了32岁。这意味着，在改革前，中国人的预期寿命每年增加1岁多──年均增幅高达2.3%。（按：也可以看作是平均到每人每年寿命增加的数字）

　　通过比较，我们更好地了解了这一成就的真正规模。需要指出的是，与人类历史上的其他主要国家相比，中国在1949年后的30年中的预期寿命增长率是最快的（按：这是历史上任何国家所没有过的寿命增长率）。我们可以举例说明：

　　在1880年后的30年中，美国每年预期寿命增幅为0.9%（主要是受内战后恢复的推动，在一段时间内出现急剧增长）。

　　在1871年后，英国的预期寿命出现了一段快速增长时期，其每年增幅不到1.0%。

　　日本预期寿命的增长较为显著，而且是在二战后经济恢复中实现快速增长的国家，在1947年后的29年中，预期寿命的年均增幅为1.3%。

　　因此，中国在1949-1978年期间所取得的2.3%预期寿命增幅，远高于这些国家按照正常标准计算得出的结果，它的表现是前所未见的出色。

　　预期寿命何时开始提高？

　　预期寿命大幅提高的这段时期引起了人们的高度关注，同时，人们也开始针对中国历史的发展问题进行激烈的辩论，并清楚地表明“历史虚无主义”的虚假性。20世纪50年代，中国取得了令人瞩目的进步──每年的平均预期寿命增长略高于9个月。印度在此期间的表现可以与中国媲美：1947-1960年之间，每年的平均预期寿命增长略低于9个月。印度的这一增长势头一直持续到1978年，这段时期的年均预期寿命提高略低于9个月。相比之下，20世纪50年代之后，中国人的预期寿命开始以极快的速度提升。在1960-1970年间，中国每年的预期寿命增长高达1岁9个月。在整个1960-1978年期间，中国每年的平均预期寿命增幅为1岁3个月。

　　1949-1978年间的这一惊人、史无前例的社会成就，不会影响对这一时期所取得的经济发展成就的分析，与有关“大跃进”和“文化大革命”的政治判断也不相抵触。但它清楚地表明，我们可以直言不讳地说，那些试图全面否定中国1978年之前社会成就的观点──如“历史虚无主义”，以及西方出版的一系列企图将改革前的中国视为一场社会灾难的书籍及其观点，是在公然篡改历史。在1949年新中国成立至毛泽东去世（1976年）的这27年间，中国人的预期寿命增加了31岁，也就是说每年增加超过1岁。相比之下，在印度取得独立27年后，印度人的预期寿命只增加了19岁。因此，中国这一时期的发展成就非但不是负面的，而是历史上最伟大的社会成就之一。

　　外国人可以不去捏造事实和杜撰神话，可以更全面地了解毛泽东在中国得到人民广泛支持的原因──抛开诸如取得真正的民族独立等问题，而只是从生存这一事实来考虑。如果有人能够让你多活31年，那么毫无疑问，他值得你尊重！

　　与随意篡改历史的那些人不同，邓小平──他与他的家人在文革期间受到严重迫害──对毛泽东的评价非常客观，他坚决反对断章取义、以偏概全，而是着眼于这段时期的整体发展轨迹──证明中国取得了巨大进步。毫无疑问，忠于历史意味着，我们需要明确指出，中国在1978年以后所取得的经济增长极为罕见，但我们不应低估改革前所取得的惊人的社会成就。习近平非常准确地评述了中国1949年后的这两个发展时期：

　　我们党领导人民进行社会主义建设，有改革开放前和改革开放后两个历史时期，这是两个相互联系又有重大区别的时期，但本质上都是我们党领导人民进行社会主义建设的实践探索。中国特色社会主义是在改革开放历史新时期开创的，但也是在新中国已经建立起社会主义基本制度、并进行了20多年建设的基础上开创的。虽然这两个历史时期在进行社会主义建设的思想指导、方针政策、实际工作上有很大差别，但两者决不是彼此割裂的，更不是根本对立的。不能用改革开放后的历史时期否定改革开放前的历史时期，也不能用改革开放前的历史时期否定改革开放后的历史时期。

　　……

　　总的来说，因为毛泽东在带领中国人民推翻外国长达一个世纪的压迫与带领中国走向民族复兴道路的过程中所发挥的作用，他在中国历史上占有一个独特的位置。他也在人类史上占有一个特殊的位置──历史与国际比较显示，人类史上从未有如此多的人如中国1949-1976年所做的一样，如此快速地提高其社会地位。这是西方与中国一些所谓的知识分子试图借历史虚无主义，抹黑中国1949-1976年间所取得的社会成就的原因。因此，像我这种不认同毛泽东经济政策──坚定支持邓小平经济政策的人，有责任站出来阐述事实，还毛泽东时代的中国一个客观的评价。

China’s social achievements under Mao Zedong were the greatest in world history

　　To avoid any misunderstanding in what follows it should be made clear that the author is an explicit supporter of the economic reforms introduced in China after 1978 and not of China’s planned economy under Mao Zedong. The author has analysed the reasons for this in ‘Deng Xiaoping – the World’s Greatest Economist’, ‘Deng Xiaoping and John Maynard Keynes’ and many other articles.

　　But there are decisive reasons why it is necessary to establish the factual truth regarding the social dynamics of China from 1949-1978, or more narrowly from 1949-1976 while Mao Zedong was alive. The first is the universal one that establishing the facts on any major event is crucial – and as China is the world’s most populous country anything that affects its development is of global significance. But secondly because the facts show that treatment of the period 1949-1976 period by some in the West, regrettably parroted by some so called ‘intellectuals’ in China, is a dirty and politically motivated frame-up. The facts show, as demonstrated below, that the social achievements of China from 1949-1976 were the greatest in any country in the whole of human history – note that the word ‘social’ is used here and not ‘economic.’ That statement is not in any sense an exaggeration but carefully chosen and made as a quantified international comparison – as the data below shows.

　　The methods used to attempt to conceal the historically unmatched social achievements of China in 1949-76 is a classic one of distortion. It is to take some individual event, distort its weight, and to take it outside the total framework of the situation. According to this classic method of distortion in the Dikotter’s word for example the situation in China was ‘hell’, whereas the facts show the reality was the exact opposite. Never in the whole of human history has the social position of so many people been improved so rapidly as in China in 1949-1976 – as will be shown in detail.

　　The aim of this article, which is a section of my forthcoming book 《大超越: 中美经济实力的最后博弈》 is therefore to give a real historical and international comparison for the social achievements of China during the period of Mao Zedong.

　　Pre-1978 developments

　　The superior post-1978 economic growth of China compared to the pre-reform period was analysed elsewhere. Nevertheless it would be misleading not to comprehend the gigantic social achievements of the 1949-78 pre-reform period. Indeed these saw the greatest social advances ever achieved in a similar period by any major country in human history – improving the living and social conditions of a far greater number of people, and a far greater proportion of humanity, than ever achieved in any other country. This evidently casts a decisive light on rounded evaluation of the pre-reform period, as well as placing in correct perspective various issues of China’s history and providing an understanding of features of China’s internal dynamics.

　　Life expectancy and human well being

　　To grasp the social trends in China in 1949-76 it should be understood that the most comprehensive criteria for judging the overall impact of social and environmental conditions in a country is average life expectancy - as this sums up and balances the combined effect of all positive and negative economic, social, environmental, health, educational and other trends. Life expectancy is therefore a more adequate measure of social well-being than purely per capita GDP - significant as the latter is, and despite per capita GDP being the single biggest determinant of life expectancy. As Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen summarized regarding the relation between these variables:

　　‘Personal income is unquestionably a basic determinant of survival and death, and more generally of the quality of life of a person. Nevertheless income is only one variable among many that affect our chances of enjoying life… The gross national product per head may be a good indicator of the average real income of the nation, but the actual incomes enjoyed by the people will also depend on the distributional pattern of that national income. Also, the quality of life of a person depends not only on his or her personal income, but also on various physical and social conditions… The nature of health care and the nature of medical insurance – public as well a private – are among the most important influences on life and death. So are the other social services, including basic education and the orderliness of urban living and the access to modern medical knowledge. There are, thus, many factors not included in the accounting of personal incomes that can be importantly involved in the life and death of people.’

　　Taking first the long term development in the People’s Republic of China, the trend of life expectancy, in relation to the most relevant comparison of India, the other largest developing economy, is shown in the Chart. In 1947, the year India achieved independence, its life expectancy was 32. China’s life expectancy in 1949, the year of the creation of the People’s Republic of China, was 35 – a gap of three years compared to India. By 1978, the last year of pre-reform China, China’s life expectancy was 67 and India’s 55 – a gap of 12 years. This sharply growing difference was not because India had a bad record - as an increase of 22 years in life expectancy over a 31 year period graphically shows. It is simply that China’s performance was sensational – life expectancy increasing by 32 years in a 29 year chronological period. This means that in pre-reform China life expectancy increased by more than a year for every chronological year that passed - an annual average increase of 2.3%.

(见上图)

　　To understand the true scale of such an achievement in comparative terms, it need simply be noted that China’s rate of increase of life expectancy in the three decades after 1949 was the fastest ever recorded in a major country in human history. For comparison:

　　The US in the thirty years after 1880, a period of sharp increase due to recovery from the Civil War, saw a 0.9% annual increase in life expectancy.

　　Life expectancy in the UK after 1871, a period of rapid growth, was under 1.0% a year.

　　Japan, a country considered to have an outstanding record in increasing life expectancy, and enjoying a rapid increase due to recovery from World War II, raised life expectancy by 1.3% a year in the 29 years after 1947.

　　China’s 2.3% increase in life expectancy in 1949-78, therefore, far outperformed all these countries whose records, by normal standards, are considered exceptional.

　　When did life expectancy increase?The period in which this spectacular increase in life expectancy was concentrated is highly interesting and casts a strong light on debates concerning China’s historical development – and shows clearly the falsity of ‘historical nihilism’. During the 1950s China made very creditable progress – life expectancy increasing by an average of slightly over nine months in each chronological year. India’s performance in this period was comparable – between 1947 and 1960 its life expectancy increased by slightly less than nine months for each chronological year. India continued this progress in the period up to 1978, with life expectancy rising by slightly under nine months for each chronological year. But after the 1950s China’s life expectancy began to rise extremely rapidly. Between 1960 and 1970 China’s life expectancy increased by a dramatic one year and nine months per chronological year. Over the entire period 1960-78 China’s life expectancy grew by an average one year and three months per chronological year.This spectacular, indeed historically unprecedented, social achievement during 1949-78 does not overturn the analysis made elsewhere of economic developments in this period, nor of political judgements concerning the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. But it shows clearly that attempts to present the pre-1978 period in an overall negative social light, as ‘historical nihilism’, and as represented in the West by a series of book attempting to present pre- reform China as socially disastrous, is, to put it straightforwardly, a blatant falsification. In the 27 years between the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, and the death of Mao Zedong in 1976, life expectancy in China increased by 31 years – or over a year per chronological year. In comparison, in the 27 years after India’s independence average life expectancy increased by 19 years. Far from being negative, China’s record in this period was one of history’s most extraordinary social achievements. Instead of engaging in factual falsification and myth making, foreigners can better understand the support for Mao Zedong in China, even leaving aside other issues, such as the achievement of real national independence, merely by the lived experience of this fact. If someone leads you to live an extra 31 years it is unsurprising you hold them in esteem!

　　In contrast to historical fabrications, Deng Xiaoping, who with his family suffered considerably during the Cultural Revolution, was therefore extremely balanced in his assessment of Mao Zedong, insisting not on taking individual episodes out of context but on taking the overall trajectory of the period, which saw immense steps forward for China. Historical accuracy certainly means clearly noting that economic growth was superior after 1978, but this should not lead to underestimation of the astonishing social achievements of the preceding pre-reform period. Xi Jinping put it very precisely on these two periods of China’s post-1949 development:

　　‘The two phases – at once related to and distinct from each other – are both pragmatic explorations in building socialism conducted by the people under the leadership of the Party. Chinese socialism was initiated after the launch of reform and opening up and based on more than 20 years of development since the socialist system was established in the 1950s after the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was founded. Although the two historical phases are very different in their guiding thoughts, principles, policies, and practical work, they are by no means separated from or opposed to each other. We should neither negate the pre- reform-and-opening-up phase in comparison with the post-reform-and -opening-up phase, nor the converse.’

　　In summary Mao Zedong evidently occupies a unique place specifically in China itself because of his role in overthrowing a century of foreign oppression and setting China on the path of national renewal. But he also occupies a special place in the common history of humanity – historical and international comparison shows that never in human history have so many people benefitted so greatly in terms of their social position as in China from 1949-1976. That is why the attempt to spread ‘historical nihilism’ regarding China’s social achievements in 1949-76 is such a dirty game - and why someone who disagrees with the economic policies of Mao Zedong, and agrees with those inaugurated by Deng Xiaoping, has the duty to state it.